How Shivaji demolished Manusmriti

-Mahavir Sanglikar

Shivaji violated many laws of Manusmriti. Here is a brief account of his Anti-Manusmriti activities.

Shivaji was a great king of medieval Maharashtra. He was contemporary of Moghul Emperor Aurangzeb and Ali Adilsah, Sultan of Bijapur. In very odd situations, Shivaji was successful in establishing his own kingdom.

Although people know him as a Hindu King, he was not a Vedic. Actually he was a follower of Shaivism in his personal life. But as a King, he was not in favor or against other religions. He was a true secular. However, he never supported the holy law book of Vedics known as Manusmriti, which was imposed on Indians for more that two millenniums. There are at least eight instances, where he breached the laws imposed by Manusmriti.

Giving Arms to Shudra People
According to the Manusmriti, only warrior communities, i.e. Kshatriyas had been given the right of bearing arms. Other people like Shudras and atishudras were banned from this right and they had no right of joining army. Shivaji breached this rule and invited people from all sections of the community to join his army. Shivaji’s army was made of cultivators, craftsmen, tribals, fishermen and people living at outskirts of villages. All these people were Shudras and atishudras according to the Manusmriti.

Collaboration with Mlenchh People
Although fanatic Vedic historians have projected him as an anti-Muslim King, Shivaji was not against Islam or Muslims. You can see a high number of Muslim officers and soldiers in his Navy, Artillery and army. The number of Shivaji’s Muslim officers and soldiers was far bigger than that of Vedic Brahmins. We should remember that both the Chiefs of Shivaji’s navy and artillery were Muslims. Even many of Shivaji’s bodyguards were Muslims. A division of Shivaji’s army was particularly for Muslims, having 700 soldiers. This number is definitely a big one, as Shivaji’s army was a not very big and all the battles he fought were with help of a tiny number of soldiers. Collaborating with Muslims was also a breach of the rules of Manusmriti, as according to it Muslims can be classified as Mlenchh people. Manusmriti never allowed accepting Mlenchh people to collaborate with.

Opposing Tradition of Sati
Shivaji breached the laws of Manusmriti again and again. According to Manusmriti, if a man dies, his wife also has to die by jumping in the funeral pyre. This tradition was known as Sati. When Shivaji’s father Shahaji died, Jijau, Shivaji’s mother decided to become a Sati, but Shivaji opposed to do so. This was again a breach of the laws of Manusmriti.

Traveling through Sea
In another instance of breaching the laws imposed by Manusmriti, Shivaji founded his own navy, and he himself traveled through sea and even took part in attack on enemy territories through sea routs. Manusmriti does not allow traveling by see and the offender has to perform penance for it. This tradition was observed even until the first half of last century. But Shivaji breached the rule and never performed a penance for it. Remember that it was 17^th century and the rules were very strict at that time.

His son learned Sanskrit Language
Manusmriti does not allow people other than Brahmins to learn, speak, and write or even to listen Sanskrit language. But overthrowing this rule, Shivaji arranged tutoring of this language for his son Sambhaji. Sambhaji became scholar of this language and wrote a book in Sanskrit. Thus we see that both Shivaji and Sambhaji were offenders according to the Manusmriti.

Reconvertion
Netaji Palekar was an officer in army of Shivaji. Eventually, he got converted to Islam. Shivaji reconverted him. His another officer Bajaji Nimbalkar had also adopted Islam. Shivaji not only reconverted Bajaji, but made him his sister in law by arranging his marriage with own daughter. This was surely against Manusmriti lawas as Manusmriti does not permit such things.

Marrying with a Dalit Woman
After establishment of his own kingdom, Shivaji wanted to coronate himself, but the Brahmins opposed to do so. They declared that Shivaji was not a Kshatriya but a Shudra, and according to Manusmriti, a Shudras can not become a king. So Shivaji coronated himself by inviting a Brahmin from Kashi, who take a huge amount of gold coins the coronation ceremony. But later Shivaji arranged another coronation according to Shakt tradition. For performing the rituals, according to the Shakt rules, he married with an Atishudra (Dalit) girl. This was also an offence of breaching the laws of Manusmriti.

Killing Brahmins
According to Manusmriti, Killing a Brahmin (Brahmhatya) is one of the biggest offences. He killed Krishnaji Bhaskar Kulkarni, a Brahmin who was the ambassador of Afzal Khan. When Shivaji and Afzal Khan met at Pratap Garh, Afzal Khan tried to kill Shivaji. But clever Shivaji killed Afzal Khan by tactic. At that time, Krishnaji Bhaskar Kulkarni stroked his sword on Shivaji, which made a wound on Shivaji’s head. Shivaji killed that Brahmin on the spot. It was not just killing of a Brahmin, but demolition of Manusmriti.

It is a subject of research that how many Brahmins were killed by Shivaji. But his son Sambhaji killed many of his Brahmin Ministers who had tried to poison him.

I think that demolition of Manusmriti was Shivaji’s greatest gift to his subjects.

What was the reaction of Brahmins for violating the rules of Manusmriti by Shivaji and Sambhaji? That is another story, on which I will write soon.

Maharashtra/Karnataka: Original Center of several Rajputs clans?

Maharashtra/Karnataka: Original Center of several Rajputs clans?

-Yashawant Malaiya

I have read a view that many of the Kuli Maratha clans in Maharashtra are descendants of Rajputs.

Based on what I have seen, it appears that to a considerable extent, reverse is true. Some of the Rajput clans originated from Maharashtra/Karnataka region with absolute certainty. Some of the others are, to the best of my knowledge, branches of clans that originated from Maharashtra/Karnataka.

Thus it appears that some of the Kuli Marathas are not Rajputs who settled in Maharashtra, rather they are relatives of their branches who settled in Rajasthan/Gujarat.

Rathore are same as Rashtrakuta. Solanki are same as Chalukya. I am quite certain that the Paramaras are a brach of Rathores, based on early Paramara copper-plates.

Consider these major Rajput clans:
Rathor=Rashtrakuta: of Jodhpur, Bikaner etc. 24 branches.
Gahadaval: of Kannauj. Regarded to be a branch of Rathors.
Bundelas: of Orchha, Datia etc. Regarded to be a branch of Gahadvals
Chandellas: of Khajuraho/Mahoba. Some obscure connection with Gahadval.
Paramara: Of Dhar/Abu. 24 branches.
Solanki=Chalukya: of Anahilavad. 16 branches.
Baghela: of Rewa. A branch of Solanki.
Silar: Shilahar of Kolhapur.
Some Rajputs do not appear to have originated fromMaharashta/Karnataka: Gahlot, Tomar, Kachhvaha, Chauhan, Parihar,Bhati.

We should note that emergence of Rajputs coincides with expansion of Rashtrakutas and Chalukyas into western/northern India.

It is also interesting to note that around the same time lineages of Jain Bharratakas (Sarasvati-Gachchha-Balatkara-Gana as well as Pustaka-gachchha-Desiya-Gana) appeared in North India. Also, theSenas appeared in Bengal after having moved from Karnataka. Rajatarangini of Kalhana mentions about adaptation of Karnataka customs in Kashmir!

Chh. Shivaji Maharaj on Postal Stamps

Chh. Shivaji Maharaj Stamp First Day Cover

Chh. Shivaji Maharaj Stamp

Chh. Shivaji Maharaj Stamp

Chh. Shivaji Maharaj Stamp

Chh. Shivaji Maharaj and Jijabai Stamp

Marathi & Maharashtri Prakrit

Both articles from Student Britannica.

Marathi language
Indo-Aryan language spoken in western and central India. Its rangeextends from north of Bombay (now Mumbai) down the western coast pastGoa and eastwards across the Deccan. In 1966, it became the officiallanguage of the State of Maharashtra. The standard form of speech isthe dialect spoken in the city of Pune (formerly Poona).

Descended from the Maharashtri Prakrit, Marathi has a significantliterature. Both Devanagiri and the cursive form of Devanagiri calledModi scripts are used for writing the language. Eastern Hindi, anIndo-Aryan language, is closely related to Marathi.

Marathi grammar marks its cases with postpositions (likeprepositions, only following words).

Prakrit languages
Middle Indo-Aryan languages known from inscriptions, literary works,and grammarian's descriptions. Prakrits are opposed to Sanskrit, fromseveral points of view. First, a distinction is made between correctand incorrect speech forms (shabda and apashabda) The former areSanskrit forms which are described by grammarians, chiefly Panini.Such correct elements are part of speech said to be adorned orpurified (samskrita) by grammar. Starting at least with Katyayana(third to the fourth century BC), grammarians have considered the useof correct forms to lead to merit, thus distinguishing them fromcoexisting incorrect Middle Indo-Aryan usage. In addition, Patanjali(second century BC) and others consider such incorrect forms ascorruptions (apabhramsha; "falling away") of acceptable correctforms.

The term prakrita is derived from prakriti, "original matter,source". There are two major views concerning the way in which thetwo are associated. First, the original matter is considered to bethe speech of common people, unadorned by grammar. Thus the Prakritsrefer to vernacular usage contrasted with the elevated register ofSanskrit usage. Alternatively, Sanskrit is itself treated as theoriginal source in which Prakrits are considered to occur. ThePrakrits are thus vernaculars that arise from Sanskrit. This is theview most commonly held by Prakrit grammarians. The distinction isalso associated with cultural differences. Prakrit grammarians granthigher status to Sanskrit by assuring it to be the source language,and formulating rules of change to account for Prakrit forms asderived from the Sanskit form. This is in consonance with thetraditions in which the Vedas have the highest religio-philosophicalstatus.

On the other hand, grammarians of the Middle Indo-Aryan languageoperate with Pali bases as such and do not accord higher status toSanskrit. This is consonant with the Buddhist tradition, that doesnot accord the Vedas and Sanskrit such ultimate status. At anotherextreme, there is the view espoused by Jains, who, as noted by NamiSadhu (himself a Shvetambara Jain), consider Ardhamagadhi, thelanguage of the Jain canon, to be the source language.

Modernscholars usually treat Pali and the languages of the Ashokaninscriptions as distinct early Middle Indo-Aryan as opposed to otherPrakrits.

Rashtrakuta Summary:

By Sanderson Beck

Origin:
The Rashtrakuta Dantidurga married a Chalukya princess and became avassal king about 733; he and Gujarat's Pulakeshin helped Chalukyaemperor Vikramaditya II repulse an Arab invasion, and Dantidurga'sarmy joined the emperor in a victorious expedition against Kanchi andthe Pallavas. After Vikramaditya II died in 747, Dantidurga conqueredGurjara, Malwa, and Madhya Pradesh. This Rashtrakuta king thenconfronted and defeated Chalukya emperor Kirtivarman II so that bythe end of 753 he controlled all of Maharashtra. The next Rashtrakutaruler Krishna I completed the demise of the Chalukya empire and wassucceeded about 773 by his eldest son Govinda II. Absorbed inpersonal pleasures, he left the administration to his brother Dhruva,who eventually revolted and usurped the throne, defeating the Ganga,Pallava, and Vengi kings who had opposed him.

Dhruva returned to the south with booty and was succeeded by histhird son Govinda III in 793. Govinda had to defeat his brotherStambha and a rebellion of twelve kings, but the two brothersreconciled and turned on Ganga prince Shivamira, whom they returnedto prison. Supreme over the Deccan, Govinda III left his brotherIndra as viceroy of Gujurat and Malava and marched his army northtoward Kanauj, which Vatsaraja's successor Nagabhata II had occupiedwhile Dharmapala's nominee Chakrayudha was on that throne. Govinda'sarmy defeated Nagabhata's; Chakrayudha surrendered, and Dharmapalasubmitted. Govinda III marched all the way to the Himalayas,uprooting and reinstating local kings.

Rashtrakuta supremacy was challenged by Vijayaditya II, who hadbecome king of Vengi in 799; but Govinda defeated him and installedhis brother Bhima-Salukki on the Vengi throne about 802. ThenGovinda's forces scattered a confederacy of Pallava, Pandya, Kerala,and Ganga rulers and occupied Kanchi, threatening the king of SriLanka, who sent him two statues. After Govinda III died in 814,Chalukya Vijayaditya II overthrew Bhima-Salukki to regain his Vengithrone; then his army invaded Rashtrakuta territory, plundering anddevastating the city of Stambha. Vijayaditya ruled for nearly half acentury and was said to have fought 108 battles in a 12-year war withthe Rashtrakutas and the Gangas. His grandson Vijayaditya III ruledVengi for 44 years (848-892); he also invaded the Rashtrakuta empirein the north, burning Achalapura, and it was reported he took gold byforce from the Ganga king of Kalinga. His successor Chalukya-Bhima Iwas king of Vengi for 30 years and was said to have turned hisattention to helping ascetics and those in distress. Struggles withhis neighbors continued though, and Chalukya-Bhima was even capturedfor a time.

The Great Amoghavarsha:
In 814 Govinda III was succeeded as Rashtrakuta ruler by his sonAmoghavarsha, only about 13 years old; Gujarat viceroy Karkka actedas regent. Three years later a revolt led by Vijayaditya II, who hadregained the Vengi throne, temporarily overthrew Rashtrakuta poweruntil Karakka reinstated Amoghavarsha I by 821. A decade later theRashtrakuta army defeated Vijayaditya II and occupied Vengi for abouta dozen years. Karkka was made viceroy in Gujarat, but his son DhruvaI rebelled and was killed about 845. The Rashtrakutas also fought theGangas for about twenty years until Amoghavarsha's daughter married aGanga prince about 860. In addition to his military activitiesAmoghavarsha sponsored several famous Hindu and Jain writers andwrote a book himself on Jain ethics. Jain kings and soldiers made anexception to the prohibition against killing for the duties ofhanging murderers and slaying enemies in battle.

Expansion after Amoghavarsha:
He died in 878 and was succeeded by his son Krishna II, who marriedthe daughter of Chedi ruler Kokkalla I to gain an ally for his manywars with the Pratiharas, Eastern Chalukyas, Vengi, and the Cholas.

Krishna II died in 914 and was succeeded by his grandson Indra III,who marched his army north and captured northern India's imperialcity Kanauj. However, Chandella king Harsha helped the PratiharaMahipala regain his throne at Kanauj. Indra III died in 922; but hisreligious son Amoghavarsha II had to get help from his Chedirelations to defeat his brother Govinda IV, who had usurped thethrone for fourteen years. Three years later in 939 Krishna IIIsucceeded as Rashtrakuta emperor and organized an invasion of Cholaand twenty years later another expedition to the north.

The end:
The Rashtrakutas reigned over a vast empire when he died in 967; butwith no living issue the struggle for the throne despite the effortsof Ganga king Marasimha III resulted in the triumph of Chalukya kingTaila II in 974. That year Marasimha starved himself to death in theJain manner and was succeeded by Rajamalla IV, whose ministerChamunda Raya staved off usurpation. His Chamunda Raya Puranaincludes an account of the 24 Jain prophets.

Chalukya and Rastrakutas

Chalukya and Rastrakutas were old rivals. They are now calledSolankis and Rathors.
Long after their decline in South, Solankis and Rathors contined torule in north. Maharajas of Bikaner and Jodhpur are Rathore andMaharajas of Rewa and some of the Maharajas of Gujarat are Solanki.
---
About AD 620 the Kalacuri king Buddharaja the grandson of Krishnarajawas defeated by Pulakesin II of the Early Chalukya dynasty, whothereafter became the lord of three Maharashtras comprising 99,000villages. One of these Maharashtras was undoubtedly Vidarbha. TheRastrakutas, who were previously feudatories of the Kalacuris,transferred their allegiance to the Chalukyas and, like the latter,began to date their records in the Saka era. Two grants of thisfeudatory Rastrakuta family have been discovered in Vidarbha-onedated Saka 615 was found at Akola and the other dated Saka 631 wasdiscovered at Multai. They give the following genealogy:-

Durgaraja

Govindaraja

Svamikaraja

Nannaraja alias Ayuddhsura
(known dates A.D. 693 and 713)

Rastrakutas overthrow early Chalukyas:
About the middle of the eighth century A.D. the Early Chalukyas wereoverthrown by the Rastrakutas. No inscriptions of the Early Chalukyashave been found in Vidarbha, but their successors the Rastrakutashave left several records. The earliest of them is the copper-plateinscription of Krishna I discovered at Bhandak and dated in the Sakayear 694 (A.D. 772). It records the grant of the village Nagana to atemple of the Sun in Udumbaramanti, modern Rani Amravati in theYavatmal district. Thereafter several grants of his grandson GovindaIII have been found in the Akola and Amravati districts of Vidarbha.The Rastrakutas of Manyakheta and the Kalacuris of Tripuri werematrimonially connected and their relations were generally friendly.But in the reign of Govinda IV, they became strained. The Kakacuriking Yuvarajadeva I espoused the cause of his son-in-low Baddiga-Amoghavarsa III, the uncle of Govinda IV and fought on the bank ofthe Payosni (Puna) 16.093 km. (10 miles) from Achalpura, between theKalacuri and Rastrakuta forces, in which the former becamevictorious. This event is Rajasekhara, which was staged at Triputi injabilation of this victory.

The next Rastrakuta record in Vidarbha is the aforementioned Devalicopper-plate grant of the reign of Baddhiga's son Krishna III, whichmentions the visaya of Nagapura-Nandi-vardhana.

Chalukyas of Kalayani:
The Rastrakuta were succeeded by the Later Chalukyas of Kalayani.Only one inscription of this family has been found in Vidarbha. It isthe so-called Sitabuldi stone inscription of the time of VikramadityaVI. From the account of Vinayakrav. Aurangabadkar this record seemsto have originally belonged to the Vindhyasana hill at Bhandak. It isdated the Saka year 1008 (A.D. 1087) and registers the grant of somenivartanas of land, for the grazing of cattle, made by a dependant ofa feudatory named Dhadibhandaka. Another inscription ofVikramaditya's reign was recently discovered at Dongarganv in theYavatmal district. It sheds interesting light on the history of theParamara dynasty. It shows that Jagaddeva, the youngest son ofUdayaditya, the brother of Bhoja, left Malva and sought service withVikramaditya VI, who welcomed him and placed him in charge of someportion of Western Vidarbha. This inscription is dated in the Sakayear 1034(A.D.1112).

Parmars of Malava:
Though western Vidarbha was thus occupied by the Later Chalukyas, theParamaras of Dhar raided and occupied some portion of easternVidarbha. A large stone inscription now deposited in the NagpurMuseum, which originally seems to have belonged to Bhandak in theChanda district, traces the genealogy of the Paramara PrinceNaravarman from Vairisimha. It is dated in the Vikrama year 1161corresponding to A.D. 1104-05, and records the grant of two villagesto a temple which was probably situated at Bhandak; for some of theplaces mentioned in it can be identified in its vicinity. ThusMokhalipataka is probably Mokhar, 80.47 km. (50 miles) west ofBhandak. Vyapura, the name of the mandala in which it was situated,may be represented by Vurganv 48.280 km. (30 miles) from Mokhar.After the downfall of the Vakatakas, there was no imperial familyruling in Vidarbha. The centre of political power shiftedsuccessively to Mahismati, Badami, Manyakheta and Kalyani.

Authors Bhavabhuti & Trivikramabhatt:
Men of learning who could not get royal patronage in Vidarbha, had toseek it elsewhere. Bhavabhuti, who ranks next to Kalidasa in Sanskritliterature, was a native of Vidarbha. In the prologue of his playMahaviracharita he tells us that his ancestors live in Padmapura inVidarbha. As stated above, this place with the village Padampur inthe Bhandara district. With the downfall of the eighth century whenBhavabhuti flourished there was no great king ruling in Vidarbha.Bhavabhuti had India, and had to get his plays staged at the fair ofKalapriyanatha ( the Sun-God at Kalpi). Later, he obtained royalpatronage at the court of Yasovarman of Kanauj. Rajasekhara, anothergreat son of Vidarbha, was probably born at Vatsagulma, (modernVasim), which he has glorified in his Kavyamimamsa as the pleasure-resort of the god of the god of love. He had his ancestorsAkalajalada, Tarala and Surananda has to leave their home country ofVidarbha and to seek patronage at the court of the Balaramayana, theBalabharata and the Karpuramanjiri, were put on the boards at Kanaujunder the patronage of the Gurjara Pratiharas. Later, when the gloryof the Pratiharas declined as sekhara seems to have returned toTripuri in the train of the victorious conqueror. There his last playViddhasalabhanjika was staged in jubilation at the victory ofYuvarajadeva over a confederacy of Southern kings led by Govinda IVin the battle of the Paysoni. Another great poet of Vidrbha who hadto go abroad in search of royal patronage is Trivikramabhatt, theauthor of the Nalacampu, in which he has given us a graphicdescription of several towns, holy paces and rivers of Vidarbha. Heflourished at the court of the Rastrakuta king Indra III and is knownto have drafted the two sets of Bagumra plates of that king, datedSaka 816.
http://www.nagpuronline.com/

Shivaji's Hoysala Origin

There is a long-standing claim that Chhatrapati Shivaji, one ofIndia's greatest warriors, and his Bhosale family were descendants ofSisodia Rajputs of Rajasthan. Contesting the claim, eminent Marathischolar Dr R.C. Dhere in his book Shikhar Shinganapurcha ShambhuMahadev says the founder of the Bhosale clan had links with theHoysala Yadavas of Karnataka.

The book focuses on the history of the Shiva temple at ShikharShinganapur in Satara, one of the sacred spots for the Maratha community. "Dr Dhere's book is the result of ten years of painstakingresearch," says Aruna Dhere, eminent Marathi writer and the scholar'sdaughter. "The origins of the Bhosales were discovered by accident."

Dhere's 101st book is bound to be controversial as it claims that acertain Baliappa was the founder of the Bhosale family. He hadrelations with the Hoysala Yadavas of Dwarsamudram (Halebid) inKarnataka. "Following the demise of Satvahanas the polity is firstinfluenced by the Abhiras and then by the Yadava lineages whichfinally resulted in a kingdom of Yadavas by the end of the 12thcentury in the Deccan. This influence of the Yadava lineagecontinues, as shown by Dr Dhere's work, up to the 17th century," saysDr Ajay Dandekar, senior research fellow at the Social Science Centreat St. Xavier's College, Mumbai.

Dr R.C. Dhere in his book Shikhar Shinganapurcha Shambhu Mahadev saysthe founder of the Bhosale clan had links with the Hoysala Yadavas of Karnataka.

The Yadavas ruled over the Konkan coast of Maharashtra, but when theDwarsamudram kingdom collapsed, most of the Yadava landlord familiessought refuge in the Vijayanagar kingdom. When the Vijayanagarkingdom declined, a branch of the Yadavas moved north and secured afoothold at Pande Pedgaon, Chambhargonde and Vaijapur in theMarathwada region of Maharashtra.

In support of his claim that Baliappa was the founder, Dhere citesevidence from Radha Madhav Vilas Champu by poet Jairam Pinde andSangeet Shah Makrand. Both mention the name of Balip (Baliappa), saysDhere.

According to Dhere, it was L.G. Ghanekar in his 1933 book PrachinDravid who first claimed that the Bhosales did not have any linkswith the Sisodia Rajputs. Not much importance was given to the claimbecause Ghanekar was not a historian.

The claim that the Bhosales are a branch of the Sisodia Rajputs can be found in the firmans of Ghorpades of Mudhol in Karnataka.According to the Ghorpade family tree, the Bhosales and they aredescendants of a Sisodia warrior.

The late Marathi historian Narahar Kurundkar in his foreword toRanjit Desai's Shriman Yogi, one of the finest literary works onShivaji's life, says that Shahaji believed that he was a Rajput because the Ghorpades considered themselves Sisodias. "Shahaji stakeda claim to the Ghorpade estates by claiming that Bhosales andGhorpades were brothers," says Kurundkar. But there is no evidence toprove that the Bhosales had Rajput origins, he says.

"When Maloji (Shahaji's father) became a soldier, he used the titleShrimant Maloji Raje. Shahaji later legalised the name by saying thatthey were Rajput Kshatriyas," wrote Kurundkar in a 1966 foreword tohis book.

In 1916, Marathi historian V.K. Rajwade found a letter of Shahaji toMuhammed Adil Shah of Bijapur saying he would not tolerate an insultsince he was a Rajput. Dhere argues that Shahaji's use of the word Rajput in the letter merely meant a soldier by profession. "Shahajihad written to complain about his cousin Trimbakji Bhosale," Dhereexplains. "He said that while he was a Rajput, his brother was anakartuk, a person who has not achieved much in his life."

Dhere says the Sisodia Rajput myth was perpetuated because ofpolitical compulsions. When Shivaji ascended the throne on June 6,1674, there was a debate about whether he was a Kshatriya or not.Gagabhatta, a Banaras Brahmin who was specially invited for thecoronation, said that Shivaji was a true-blooded Kshatriya andconducted the coronation in the Rajasthani Rajput style. "Shivajiused this Rajput angle only once at his coronation as he was moreconcerned about achieving his goal of establishing a 'Swarajya',"says Dhere.

The Bhosale family never mentioned their so-called Rajput origins. Itwas only after the Mughals released Shahu, Shivaji's grandson, in1707 that he started claiming that the Bhosales were Sisodia Rajputs.Dhere says that those who believe in the Rajput link base their viewson Sabhasad Bakhar (1697), which Krishnaji Anant Sabhasad, acouncillor in Shivaji's court wrote 17 years after Shivaji's death.In the Sabhasad Bakhar, Shivaji is quoted as saying, "Amhi Chitodche Sisodia Rajput (We are Sisodia Rajputs from Rajasthan).

"There are various views about the origins of the Bhosale family,"says Dr G.T. Kulkarni, a contemporary historian. "Dhere's thesis isone of them. People tend to get very emotional whenever the topic ofShivaji comes up for discussion, so we will have to analyse theevidence scientifically." He points out that in a letter Shivajiaddressed his commander Jedhe Deshmukh as 'Rajputani Deshmukh.' Atthe same time, no letter has been discovered in which Shivaji claims that he is a Rajput, says Kulkarni.